fbpx

Tenants Must Bear Cost of Safety Improvements

15th August 2018 By Arman Khosravi

Following the Grenfell disaster in 2017, cladding has come under close scrutiny with surveys being carried out as a priority in buildings across the UK. The failure to comply with Building Regulations (Part L1A 2010), which provides a framework for ensuring that no overheating issues are created as a result of works undertaken, is clearly quite widespread and the need for remedial action in such cases is clear.

However, the question that has arisen with regard to the rectification of such defects is whose responsibility it is to meet the often very considerable cost.

That issue was recently addressed by the First-tier Tribunal (FTT), which considered who should pick up the bill for making 95 flats safe. The owner of the building is a major building group. Following a survey by the London Fire Brigade, repair works were specified which will cost nearly £500,000 and it was recommended that fire marshals be retained to patrol the blocks at an annual cost of more than £250,000.

If the cost of the fire marshals was a cost ‘reasonably incurred’ by the landlord, it would be recoverable from the tenants under their leases (£50 per week per flat). In addition, it was argued that the cost of the cladding was also recoverable from the tenants through their service charges.

The FTT concluded that the cost of the fire marshals was reasonable and that as it was in compliance with the Fire Service’s advice, it was properly recoverable from the tenants.

The cladding cost was also reasonable, especially given the short timescale in which replacement was sought. In this case, the landlord was required to make good any inherent structural defects and to maintain the premises in ‘good and substantial repair’.

Both of these costs stand to be met by the tenants under their leases by way of the service charges.

Bearing in mind the burden this will place on the tenants, an appeal is expected.

Source: Concious

Latest News

Award That Requires Borrowing Made Into Court Order

17th May, 2024 By

Disagreements between separating couples all too often result in litigation that substantially reduces the assets available to them, as was illustrated by a case that recently reached the High Court. At issue was whether awards made by arbitrators in financial remedy proceedings can be made into court orders even if that would require one of the parties to borrow money. The couple had previously had a relationship lasting a few years before resuming their relationship in 2015. They had two children before separating again in 2019. Following their separation, the...

Inheritance Disputes – Costs Risks Can Be Reduced

15th May, 2024 By

Arguments about what someone promised before their death can lead to significant legal costs. However, if faced with a claim against the estate, there may be steps the beneficiaries or executors can take to reduce the risks, as a recent High Court case illustrated. A man had left a farmhouse and agricultural land in Cornwall to his wife, with whom he had also jointly owned a neighbouring area of land. After his death, one of the couple's daughters and her husband claimed that he had told them he wanted them...

Share Rounding Error Does Not Prevent CGT Relief

13th May, 2024 By

There are often very specific rules that must be complied with in order to claim tax reliefs, but if a small mistake arises, the courts may be able to provide assistance. In a recent case, the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) found that an investor was entitled to Entrepreneurs' Relief on the disposal of his shares in a company, despite owning one share fewer than he needed to qualify for it. The investor had agreed to purchase 5 per cent of the shares in the company for £500,000. He wished to own...

Wife Entitled to Maintenance Until Sale of Family Home

10th May, 2024 By

When divorcing couples disagree on how assets should be divided, the courts will seek to arrive at a fair outcome for both parties. In deciding how the proceeds of sale of a former couple's home should be apportioned, the Family Court agreed with the wife that she should receive maintenance payments until the sale took place. The couple had married in 2006. Following a brief separation, they had reconciled for two years before finally separating in 2022. The husband and wife both contended that they should be entitled to about...